Various vAda-s in advaita (was Re: A few questions)

Anand Hudli ahudli at APPN.CI.IN.AMERITECH.COM
Thu Jan 30 10:19:32 CST 1997

          egodust wrote:
> However, if within the vaadas given in the maanasollasa vaartika--as
> Anand points out--, the supporting idea is that Brahman is active, puts
> a confusing spin on the vaada, and technically shouldn't be referred to as
> drishti-shrishti, IMO.  This is also the big reservation I have regarding

  I did not make myself clear. I am not saying that activity is in Brahman
  as per dR^ishhTi-sR^ishhTi-vAda. Any theory of advaita will deny activity
  in Brahman and I am sure this one does the same. All I was trying to say
  was that there are some features of Kashmir Shaivism in maanasollaasa.
  At the same time, I wholeheartedly agree that the maanasollaasa is a
  lucid exposition of the major tenets of advaita. After all, Kashmir
  Shaivism and advaita agree on many points.

> Kashmir Shaivism.  *However*, I think it's almost as misleading to conclude
> that Brahman is nishkriya!  In this regard, I think in Sankara's emphasizing
> this point, He was strictly addressing entry-level vyavaharikas; whereas

    Shankara's main objective, at least in his major works, is to
    interpret Vedaanta and show that it represents one philosophy by
    reconciling seemingly differing views in it. That is why Shankara
    claims that his philosophy is that of the upanishhads. Whatever
    is in his philosophy has a basis in the upanishhads. For example,
    nishhkalaM nishhkriyaM shaantaM, this is what the upanishhads talk
    about. Calling Brahman nishhkriya has nothing to do with entry-level
    or advanced students.

> the more advanced would be ready to understand that *any* affirmative
> or negative characteristic applied to Brahman is grossly misleading,
> including Satchidananda Itself!  As it has been explained, the *only*

   Agreed. As Vidya pointed out earlier, all advaitins will accept
   the ajaati-vaada as being ultimately valid. Brahman is beyond all
   description, so all talk of Brahman will fail to capture its meaning.

> Namaskaar.
> Frank


More information about the Advaita-l mailing list